Obama Budget Supersizes U.S. Funding for UN, Global Military

At a time of soaring U.S. budget deficits, brutal economic hardship for tens of millions of Americans, and unprecedented levels of federal spending, the Obama administration is asking Congress to drastically increase U.S. funding for the scandal-plagued United Nations and its oftentimes ruthless so-called international “peacekeeping” troops. However, rather than rewarding the widely criticized “dictators’ club” with more borrowed or confiscated funds, critics say U.S. lawmakers should cut off all funding to the UN — and eventually withdraw from the sovereignty-subverting outfit altogether.

In its fiscal year 2015 budget request, which seeks almost $4 trillion in spending overall, the Obama administration is asking Congress to approve a massive 33-percent hike in U.S. taxpayer handouts to the UN and other international organizations. In addition, the White House is pushing “contributions” to so-called global “peacekeeping” schemes that are a full 43 percent larger than last year, sparking outrage from critics.

Most of the proposed increase in UN military funding, the administration says, will go to deploying even more UN troops to prop up the dubious regimes ruling war-torn African nations such as Mali, South Sudan, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and more. The self-styled global military already has about 100,000 UN troops and “police” deployed across 15 “missions,” along with more than 15,000 civilians. Apparently, though, the UN and Obama want more.

Of course, the Orwellian-sounding UN “peacekeeping” forces — the infamous “blue helmets” would be more appropriately referred to as international war-making troops — have become loathed around the world. Among the most serious problems associated with the global soldiers under UN command: widespread brutality, human-rights abuses, sexual exploitation of civilians, mass murder, spreading deadly diseases, brazen corruption, impunity, ruthlessly propping up illegitimate UN-backed regimes, and more. By late 2013, the stench of scandal and horror around UN “peace” forces was so overbearing that even the establishment press around the world was forced to report it.

Last year, though, the U.S. government still sent over $1.75 billion to prop up the UN’s fledgling armed forces and their lawless “missions” around the globe — on top of paying for almost a quarter of the UN’s budget. In response to the perpetually ballooning scandals surrounding the international war-making troops, the Obama administration now hopes to reward them with more than $2.5 billion borrowed from abroad or extracted from U.S. taxpayers.

The UN and other international outfits, meanwhile, would receive more than $4 billion under the White House request, not including the huge expenditures for the global military. In a perfect example of Obama’s deceitful scheming, instead of ending the “Overseas Contingency Operations” (OCO) expenditures that were sold as a temporary measure to pay for U.S. wars abroad over the last decade, the administration is trying to preserve that funding — and divert it to UN “peacekeeping” operations.

“This appropriation provides funds for the United States to support unforeseen requirements of peacekeeping operations and activities, including peace enforcement missions [sic] undertaken directly by the United Nations, or by regional coalition forces,” explains the relevant section of the administration’s budget request. Obama is seeking $150 million for that particular plot, in addition to the $2.5 billion for regular UN “peacekeeping” and another $235 million for the military forces of illegitimate “regional bodies” such as the “African Union.”

In the meantime, the UN is working to come up with a palatable pretext for global taxation, thereby freeing it from having to operate on “contributions” taken from taxpayers indirectly via member governments and dictatorships. According to analysts, though, even without the highly sought after planetary tax regime, UN “revenue” almost tripled in the decade between 2002 and 2012. Why it would need even more funding from struggling U.S. taxpayers and a federal government that is already drowning the public in debt remains unclear.

Justifying its call for massively expanding the amount of funds extracted from U.S. taxpayers for the UN, the White House claimed implausibly that it was somehow in America’s “national interest” to squander more money it does not have on dictator-dominated globalist organizations notorious for seeking to undermine U.S. sovereignty. “The administration is committed to robust multilateral engagement and to promoting U.S. leadership in international organizations as a means of advancing U.S. national security interests and values,” the request claims. At the same time, the administration is working overtime to “reform” the IMF, which globalists are grooming to become a planetary central bank, by vastly expanding the resources at its disposal while giving up U.S. influence at the outfit.

The 2015 budget request also seeks almost $50 billion for unconstitutional “foreign aid” via just the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which is used to bribe foreign powers while also funding domestic projects to attack free markets. “Mindful of fiscal constraints, this budget provides American taxpayers a remarkable return on their investment in American leadership,” the State Department claimed, apparently without intending to sound facetious. The federal government, of course, is not constitutionally authorized to distribute foreign aid or to fund attacks on the U.S. Constitution and American independence via the UN.

Unsurprisingly, globalists and UN apparatchiks celebrated the Obama administration’s request for vastly more funding to the international outfit and its global military wing. Vice President for Public Policy Peter Yeo with the extremist "UN Foundation," for example, even claimed that the $2.5 billion for global “peacekeeping” schemes “would make real progress on getting the U.S. out of the red at the UN and back in good standing with our allies and international partners.”

In other words, Yeo was transparently implying that U.S. taxpayers somehow “owe” their wealth and the fruits of their labor to the UN’s armed forces. In a bizarre twist of reasoning, Yeo, who works with the “Better World Campaign” as well, also suggested that if the UN did not fight the wars demanded by globalists, the U.S. government would have to fight them alone. It was not clear whether he thought the American people and their elected representatives ought to have a say in that, despite the Constitution’s requirement that all wars be declared by Congress.

It is time for real change. Instead of saddling the American people with even more odious debt to the Communist Chinese regime and the privately owned Federal Reserve to prop up and reward the out-of-control UN, lawmakers should defund the radical international outfit altogether. Legislation currently in Congress, H.R. 75: American Sovereignty Restoration Act, would end all U.S. participation in the UN, including all handouts to the outfit from American taxpayers. Introduced by Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.), the bill has nine co-sponsors so far.

The timing to get the U.S. government out of the UN, which would set the globalists back decades, could not be better. And with more public pressure and awareness, that goal may not be too far off.

Photo: AP Images

Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, education, politics, and more. He can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU.

Thank you for joining the discussion at The New American. We value our readers and encourage their participation, but in order to ensure a positive experience for our readership, we have a few guidelines for commenting on articles. If your post does not follow our policy, it will be deleted.

No profanity, racial slurs, direct threats, or threatening language.

No product advertisements.

Please post comments in English.

Please keep your comments on topic with the article. If you wish to comment on another subject, you may search for a relevant article and join or start a discussion there.

Comments that we consider abusive, spammy, off-topic, or harassing will be removed.

If our filtering system detects that you may have violated our policy, your comment will be placed in a queue for moderation. It will then be either approved or deleted. Once your comment is approved, it will then be viewable on the discussion thread.

If you need to report a comment, please flag it and it will be reviewed. Thank you again for being a valued reader of The New American.